thoughts on the announced Kodak film price increase?

[Pieter12]

When photography gets expensive, I will just have to eat cake rather than shoot digitally, except for remote sensing from a spacecraft.

From that I conclude eating cake gives you the same satisfaction as film photography.

 

[Sirius Glass]

From that I conclude eating cake gives you the same satisfaction as film photography.

Actually film photography is healthier for me than eating cake. Photography avoids triglycerides.

 

[Pieter12]

No, still a photographer. Your rewriting your definition changes nothing but wasting your energy.

Working in a darkroom does not necessarily mean that you have taken the photograph. As an aside I would wager that 50% of this forum's members do not wet print their work.

 

[MattKing]

Working in a darkroom does not necessarily mean that you have taken the photograph. As an aside I would wager that 50% of this forum's members do not wet print their work.

Which means that 50% do.
But that is irrelevant if one is considering how important (or not) the darkroom is to those who choose to do so.
FWIW, I have printed for others. And that collaboration can be one of the most artistically satisfying as any you might encounter.
It can also be drudgery.
There is no limit to the variety of the photographic process.

 

[laingsoft]

Sorry to hear you wouldn't be interested in photography without film. What would you do then? Photography is not about film, it is about the images.

I'd probably just continue making dry plates. If photography is about images then there's no contest that digital is significantly better imaging medium than film in every imaginable way. The developing process is half the fun.

 

[laingsoft]

Working in a darkroom does not necessarily mean that you have taken the photograph. As an aside I would wager that 50% of this forum's members do not wet print their work.

What's your opinion on computational photography? Do you consider computational photography to be photography? The algorithms in your phone can make better images than anyone on this forum,

 

[mshchem]

I printed an old 2 1/4 × 3 1/4 roll film negative the other day. My friend who is a railroad nut, he found a negative, wanted a print. Must have been 3 stops overexposed, it was sharp, but had a weird stain. Took me forever.
I enjoy darkroom work a lot.
I would go nuts without photography, most every technology to come along in the last 150 years has been applied to photography. I love digital and film. I need to try making a little movie, haven't done that since high-school.

 

[Ivo Stunga]

I knew it was only a matter of time before this discussion cultivated a new name to add to my ignore list.

I'm well aware of that, and have unticked them respective boxes up there. Not because I hate digital (too strong a feeling), nor want it dead - it just means nothing to me, you can have all the fun with it, though.

And you're absolutely right - I don't care, because an offence wasn't what was projected. I do use colorful language, yes. Does it make my points less valid?
Or is it that somebody just saw the words Fuck and Shit, took them out of their warm amd fuzzy context, and took an immediate offense + threatened to block me because of the language used? Yup, seems appropriate in the political climate today. Happy Block button smashing, my friend.

For all is worth, I could've expressed the same sentiment without any "controversial" words in - message says the same: no interest in digital, I viewe them as two completely separate worlds with totally different toolsets.
If you take an offence where none was intended - isn't that kinda your problem? If you get offended by my dislike of digital, I'd ask you: what's wrong, why so sensitive, and are you OK?

 

[Ai Print]

Hmmmmm…..it seems this site has a new “Rattymouse”, lol.

Also, here is a solid case for the desire to shoot film and produce prints in a darkroom:

https://www.magnumphotos.com/newsro...cDq086q-Nfe7FBpZXpj7vjCAE8I2vEarQoMb5dhGr0-OY

 

[Don_ih]

If Kodak raises its prices a significant amount, it will cause many people to stop buying Kodak film (these people will buy film from other manufacturers, which is currently less expensive). Then it's not a matter of Kodak makes film that doesn't sell so lowers its price again, because Kodak has to make money. What will happen is Kodak will stop making those films that don't sell. It's a company that does not seem interested in supporting still photography any longer.
The claim that they can only make massive orders of materials is interesting but a bit ridiculous. They have the technical ability to design new, smaller-scale machinery. As for affordability, if Adox can make a new factory with new machinery, Kodak (which must outsell them by a multiple of thousands) definitely can. But, no, instead Kodak produces no paper and sold off their film chemistry and already charges more for what they still make than anyone else. The next move will probably be to get Shanghai to manufacture their Tmax line.

 

[removed account4]

That would officially be the end for me and anything branded Kodak.

They will still have their line of Kodak Branded AA and AAA Batteries, scarfs, hats, TEEShirts ... and 90 minute Cassette Tapes; but Polaroid gives them stiff competition in those departments. They also have a MINI HD Video Cube (POLAROID ) sells for like $5 at the register at my local Jobber.

 

[sasah zib]

Kodak is in
Prepress 59%
Digital printing 24%
Advanced materials (includes Kodak Research Lab) Motion pictures, film and chemicals 15%

Fujifilm is in Film and photographic products to about 13% -
Consider the relative market attractiveness of these two companies: Kodak received a loan as they pivoted to making basic chemicals for healthcare (hand cleaner for prisons and subways, as a wag would said) Fujifilm developed a drug and brought it to trial (not to market).

Fuji has clearly stated their intentions and directions. Kodak is left with raising prices in a falling market.
Those of you in Colorado (Windsor), take a drive by Carestream. How does the parking lot look?

 

[Saganich]

If Kodak raises its prices a significant amount, it will cause many people to stop buying Kodak film (these people will buy film from other manufacturers, which is currently less expensive).

Yup, I just doubled down on 200 ft HP5 and 100 ft of Kentmere, both new films that will require time and testing to get where I like it. I haven't used anything other than TriX for about 20 years, but I'm feeling like all my eggs are in one basket these days so it's worth the time and effort to cultivate the use of 'other' film.

 

[laingsoft]

If Kodak raises its prices a significant amount, it will cause many people to stop buying Kodak film (these people will buy film from other manufacturers, which is currently less expensive). Then it's not a matter of Kodak makes film that doesn't sell so lowers its price again, because Kodak has to make money.

I'm gonna disagree with you here. Tmax, Ektar and Portra are the best films on the market, hands down. Not that Hp5 or Fuji's products are bad, but Ektar and Portra are pretty much the standard every color film is compared against. I think people would eat the cost and still buy it, even and Polaroid prices.

 

[cramej]

I'm gonna disagree with you here. Tmax, Ektar and Portra are the best films on the market, hands down. Not that Hp5 or Fuji's products are bad, but Ektar and Portra are pretty much the standard every color film is compared against. I think people would eat the cost and still buy it, even and Polaroid prices.

Kodak no longer has any competition for pro color negative film. They win by default and therefore can charge whatever they want. People will stop buying it if it's too expensive because the costs of digital will make more financial sense. I can get a used D7200 for $600 and I already have a 50mm AFd and 28-80af. $600 only buys me 17 rolls of Portra 400 processed and scanned. Now that I say type it out, it already sounds pretty good.

In my book, Tmax is meh.

 

[YoIaMoNwater]

I'm gonna disagree with you here. Tmax, Ektar and Portra are the best films on the market, hands down. Not that Hp5 or Fuji's products are bad, but Ektar and Portra are pretty much the standard every color film is compared against. I think people would eat the cost and still buy it, even and Polaroid prices.

That’s just like, your own opinion, man .

 

[faberryman]

I'm gonna disagree with you here. Tmax, Ektar and Portra are the best films on the market, hands down. Not that Hp5 or Fuji's products are bad, but Ektar and Portra are pretty much the standard every color film is compared against. I think people would eat the cost and still buy it, even and Polaroid prices.

How about you? How much extra per roll are you willing to pay for Tmax, Ektar, and Portra? Do you even shoot Tmax, Ektar, and Portra? I suspect different people have different film preferences and different levels of price sensitivity.

 

[pentaxuser]

That’s just like, your own opinion, man .

Unfortunately in terms of predicting the effect on Kodak film sales isn't the fact that each of us, me included, is by and large giving our own opinion and assuming that if most or even enough of the rest of the film buying community think the same but we just don't know

All we can say is that it is likely that there comes a point at which the recent frequency and size of increases is almost bound to adversely affect film sales to the detriment of revenue. Where that point is I don't know. The size of our participatory group is, I feel, far too small to really be significant in statistical terms

pentaxuser

 

[BrianShaw]

How about you? How much extra per roll are you willing to pay for Tmax, Ektar, and Portra? Do you even shoot Tmax, Ektar, and Portra? I suspect different people have different film preferences and different levels of price sensitivity.

Those are interesting questions; Not sure that they are easy to answer… but thought provoking. Back in the Polaroid days I loved both B&W and color sheet Polaroid, for both straight and alternative uses. I shot as much as I could afford and in hindsight that wasn’t enough. It was great product and some of my finest work is on Polaroid “film”. Portra is my current lust and I’m doing the same thing… probably not shooting enough. The cost of film is like the cost of gas (petrol) where it is easy to complain about price increases but equally easy to adapt and get over the shock. Then we reminisce about “the good old days”.

 

[faberryman]

Unfortunately in terms of predicting the effect on Kodak film sales isn't the fact that each of us, me included, is by and large giving our own opinion and assuming that if most or even enough of the rest of the film buying community think the same but we just don't know

All we can say is that it is likely that there comes a point at which the recent frequency and size of increases is almost bound to adversely affect film sales to the detriment of revenue. Where that point is I don't know. The size of our participatory group is, I feel, far too small to really be significant in statistical terms

I am pretty sure Kodak has done some market research and worked up a price/demand curve and has an idea when higher prices and lower sales will result in lower income. Of course, predicting such things is not an exact science and Kodak has made mistakes before, some of them real lulus.

 

[Ai Print]

I’d pay $15 to $20 a roll for 120 TMY-2, it’s that good a film to me.

 

[mshchem]

That would officially be the end for me and anything branded Kodak.

SinoPromise didn’t acquire that business, Eastman Kodak is the owner of the film production, I can't see that changing.

 

[FotoD]

That’s just like, your own opinion, man .

This dude abides no more. Not at these prices. So long Kodak, will miss TMY2.

 

[laingsoft]

How about you? How much extra per roll are you willing to pay for Tmax, Ektar, and Portra? Do you even shoot Tmax, Ektar, and Portra? I suspect different people have different film preferences and different levels of price sensitivity.

I shoot a lot more Ektar than Tmax or Portra, but yeah It's expensive and I have to be conservative with my frames. When it comes to daily snapshotting I'm not going to use anything other than Gold 200 or Orwo. If it's somewhere a bit more important or the conditions are a little more challenging I'll use Hp5 or Delta or XP2, but if it's something deeply important to me and I absolutely want to get the best result I will absolutely use Tmax/Portra/Ektar regardless of the cost. It's one of those "buy once/cry once" type things in my head.

 

[faberryman]

I shoot a lot more Ektar than Tmax or Portra, but yeah It's expensive and I have to be conservative with my frames. When it comes to daily snapshotting I'm not going to use anything other than Gold 200 or Orwo. If it's somewhere a bit more important or the conditions are a little more challenging I'll use Hp5 or Delta or XP2, but if it's something deeply important to me and I absolutely want to get the best result I will absolutely use Tmax/Portra/Ektar regardless of the cost. It's one of those "buy once/cry once" type things in my head.

I don't really understand this idea of shooting lower cost film when its not important. When is it not important? I guess it depends on how you approach photography, and how and what you shoot, and what you plan to do with the image after you shoot it. The concept of "daily snapshotting" is foreign to me. What exactly is that? If I were just posting pictures of my lunch on Instagram I might think about using a lower cost film. Actually, I would just shoot digital. I guess everybody is different.